Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Hacking, Tony and the Roswell Slides, Part II


(Blogger’s Note: A couple of weeks ago, Tony sent me the tale of the hacking with an article to be posted then. After a couple of days, I emailed him and asked if he still wished for it to be posted. At that point he withdrew it and thought it best to wait. Last week I learned that Rich Reynolds had posted a hacking story that differed in some aspects from what Tony had said to me. I asked Tony, at that point, if he wished to post his version. He sent a new article to me. I found a point or two I thought were needlessly aggressive and asked to tone those down. He provided his suggestions. Thinking that this was a story that needed to be told, I posted it… not knowing that with 24 hours Tony and Rich Reynolds would come to an understanding that seems to be acceptable to both.

This annoys me, not because I posted the story or because the two of them seemed to be at odds, but because this seems to be one of manipulation. There was no real need to publish any of this, given the outcome. It has ruffled feathers, it has caused trouble among researchers, and it keeps the Roswell slides story in the forefront of UFO research where it does not belong today.

The revelations made in Tony’s article about what is on the slides and some of the documentation that is claimed is, in a way, irrelevant to the story. This was a tale of hacking into personal email accounts and sharing the stolen emails with others. It is a story of an invasion of privacy and in today’s world we have way too little of that left with all the spying done by government agencies, all operating for our safety, so they say. Anyone who understands the basics of the Internet can find out all sorts of information on anyone else… there is just too much information available, but there is no way to return to the days when our private lives were private… but I digress.

As I say, there are two stories here. One is the hacking and the other is the slides. No corroboration for any of the information about the slides has been presented… and no, I don’t expect there to be. I believe that Tom Carey and Don Schmitt were right in attempting to protect the story, the sources, the investigation, until they had done what they could to verify the information. Premature disclosure could harm that investigation. The time to criticize it was after they came out with their claims and presented the evidence they had gathered. At that point, it all becomes fair game. But to snipe from the woods before that information is presented could damage the work before they complete it.

Yes, I would like to know the whole story, to verify the claims, to interview the witness or witnesses, but I also know that sometimes you must hang onto the information or the sources dry up and the opportunity is lost. So, for those who want to know right now what they have, I say a little patience can’t hurt. Tom has said the information will be available after the first of the year, and once it is in the public domain, that is the time to verify what is said. Until we have the facts, there isn’t much we can do other than speculate.

So, following is the latest from Tony. It is, I believe, a modification of what he sent to Rich Reynolds. For those of you who hoped for more, sorry. For those who wish to have a final answer on the Roswell slides, sorry. For those of you who are tired of these little range wars, sorry. There really isn’t much else to be said at this time.)


ROSWELL HACKING STORY RESOLVED
BY ANTHONY BRAGALIA

Rich Reynolds and I have agreed to put to rest the ‘Roswell Slides’ hacking story and to peacefully end the matter. This was done in large part because in so doing we are avoiding falling right into the trap intended by the hacker, which is to fracture everyone apart from one another in the UFO community even further.

In an email that I had received from the hacker he indicated that was his precise intent. Rich and I have elected to not play into the hacker’s hands. I frankly do not know if this hacker is affiliated with intelligence, or, instead, a disaffected lone person that gets his jollies out of such things. But we were all at some level tangled in his web and have now elected to get out of it.  To give further attention to the hacker through endlessly writing about it in an ever-escalating way is exactly what the hacker wanted and delights in. So we’re just not going to give him the satisfaction.  We are in concurrence that we all really do want to take the drama away and to stop feeding the hacker’s perverse pleasure. We are going to take a higher road than he is on and move on…

15 comments:

  1. > Tom Carey and Don Schmitt were right in attempting to protect the story, the sources, the investigation, until they had done what they could to verify the information.

    But that's not what happened. Carey recently declared the slides a "smoking gun" ... but did not produce any evidence for this claim.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The whole story reeks of falsehood. Add in the the silly musings by Ross about three letter agencies and you have in a nutshell the stupidity of UFO research. Tony, post the supposed hacker emails. WITH HEADERS. Prove your claims for once.

    Lance

    ReplyDelete
  3. Terry -

    You are, of course, correct here. While they were conducting the investigation, prior to any announcement about this, they were correct in keeping it quiet. Once they appear in front of the press and make the sort of announcement they did, it was time to present the evidence. The announcement changed the game about what should be available to the rest of us.

    Lance -

    At this point, such would open the wounds again... the evidence should be presented, but I fear that it is not too late.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm with Lance on this one; this incident strikes me as self-generated drama, maybe as a way to make people think certain individuals are more involved with the slides than they actually are.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Capt Steve -

    The drama was created by a couple of indviduals... and I am more than a little annoyed at the whole thing. We will not, however, get to the whole truth on this now.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So it was NOT the work of some government agency after all. Let us be thankful for small mercies.

    But wait a minute: those ET bodies are still in government hands, aren't they?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lance,

    Given the Snowden revelations is it really so outlandish? As to email headers, the IP addresses in the ones I researched led to TOR exit nodes

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nick Redfern will confirm that the hacking/interception stuff was real.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes Ross, it is outlandish to assume (and pontificate about) such an unsupported belief. In other words, it's like most saucer discussion! That you equate everything in your imaginary saucer world with things that are in the actual real world is quite hilarious, too.

    Lance

    ReplyDelete
  10. Lance,

    Rick Doty's work out of KAB show that there is government interest in monitoring and sowing disinformation with researchers.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Ross
    > Rick Doty's work out of KAB show that there is government interest

    The government is interested or some jackass who happened to work for the government?

    And are you really equating the importance of Anthony Bragalia with that of James McDonald?

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Rick Doty's work out of KAB show that there is government interest in monitoring and sowing disinformation with researchers."

    As Terry points out, the Doty story stinks just about as much as this one.

    That you use the following "logic":

    This unsubstantiated claim exists THEREFORE my similar claim from my own fantasy world must be true.

    ...is UFO silliness at its most pathetic.

    Lance

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lance,

    And just what would you know about it? You may fool some people here into engaging with you as if you are an informed and honest sceptic, but not me.

    If as it seems all this topic does is antagonise you then why engage with it? I am tired of seeing you strut around blogs rubbishing everything and everyone there, and then demanding that your egotism be indulged by having people set about proving this or that to *your* satisfaction.

    This is going to come as a shock Lance, but pretty much nobody could give a crap what you believe or do not believe about this or any other topic; you just aren't that important.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ross referred to the [Edward] Snowden revelations. What a great pity Snowden's revelations did not include any mention of UFOs.

    This could mean, of course, that even a guy like Snowden was not privy to such things. However, I can think of a far better reason why Snowden never revealed any UFO-related stuff. But that would take us very off topic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm the other Ross. I occasionally post here and on some other paranormal sites (such as Magonia and Retro-Forteana). I'm not the Ross who wrote the previous comments responding to Lance. Just wanted to clarify that.

    ReplyDelete